Sorry, but your post wasn't pointing out anything, it was just a single question which could be interpreted in many ways. I interpreted it as your confusion over what Udacity is and tried to help.
Only someone who didn't read the article could misinterpret my comment.
> and tried to help.
That is probably even true! As I said in my previous reply, YOU SHOULD HAVE READ THE ARTICLE! People like you writing comments without knowing the topic - the bane of Internet discussions.
Why do you keep saying saying that? My comment has had nothing to do with the article itself, it was simply intended to answer what I interpreted as a confusion in the comment.
As I already said, only an asshole like yourself that didn't read the article could misinterpret my comment.
I get it that some people have trouble admitting they are wrong, but you take cognitive dissonance to new heights. I bet you still didn't read the article, because you could not care less about the topics. You just want to "participate". You poor, poor little man.
Says one of the two participants of a pointless Internet argument that no one else cares about (as is evident by all of the downvotes in this exchange).
How's that saying go? "Arguing on the Internet ... you're still retarded"?
What downvotes? I can't see what votes you got. You can't see what votes I got - they are all perfectly black. I see gray on two of the comments that replied to me.
So this is a very interesting comment that you leave here... long after anyone else comes to this entire thread, which has long disappeared from the homepage (and no new comments except for in this thread)... why would you think I got downvotes unless it was you who tried?
.
Pro-tip: Those people who really don't care about a discussion ignore it, at most they cast a vote.
